U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics ----------------------------------------------------- This report is one in series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all reports in the series go to http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=38 This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.csv) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available on BJS website at: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=4655 ------------------------------------------------------ Jail Inmates at Midyear 2012 - Statistical Tables Todd D. Minton, BJS Statistician May 2013, NCJ 241264 ************************************************************ After three consecutive years of decline in the jail inmate population, the number of persons confined in county and city jails (744,524) increased by 1.2% (or 8,923 inmates) between midyear 2011 and midyear 2012 (figure 1, table 1). The majority of the increase occurred in California jails. Excluding the increase in California’s jail population, the nationwide jail population would have remained relatively stable during the period. (For more information on California, see the text box on page 2.) The average daily population (ADP) in jails remained stable from 735,565 during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2011, and 735,983 during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2012. The jail incarceration rate--the confined population per 100,000 U.S. residents--remained stable between 2011 (236 per 100,000) and 2012 (237 per 100,000). The incarceration rate was down from a high of 259 jail inmates per 100,000 residents in 2007. Overall, males accounted for 87% of the jail population at midyear 2012 (tables 2 and 3). Whites accounted for 46% of the total, blacks represented 37%, and Hispanics represented 15% of inmates. About 5,400 juveniles were held in local jails (or less than 1% of the confined population). At midyear 2012, about 6 in 10 inmates were not convicted, but were in jail awaiting court action on a current charge—a rate unchanged since 2005. About 4 in 10 inmates were sentenced offenders or convicted offenders awaiting sentencing. ************************************************* The majority of the increase in the jail inmate population occurred in large jails ************************************************* Nearly 91% of the increase in the confined population during 2012 occurred in the largest jail jurisdictions-- those with an average daily population of more than 1,000 inmates (table 4). The largest jails held 48% of the jail population at midyear 2012, but accounted for less than 10% of all jail jurisdictions nationwide. The population declined in jail jurisdictions holding 500 to 999 inmates. The share of offenders in jail jurisdictions holding less than 500 inmates did not change significantly between 2011 and 2012, indicating that these jail jurisdictions had somewhat similar rates of increase in their population. ************************************** California Public Safety Realignment ************************************** On May 23, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ruling by a lower three-judge court that the State of California must reduce its prison population to 137.5% of design capacity (approximately 110,000 prisoners) within two years to alleviate overcrowding. In response, the California State Legislature and governor enacted two laws--AB 109 and AB 117—to reduce the number of inmates housed in state prisons starting October 1, 2011. The Public Safety Realignment (PSR) policy is designed to reduce the prison population through normal attrition of the existing population while placing new nonviolent, nonserious, nonsex offenders under county jurisdiction for incarceration in local jail facilities. Inmates released from local jails will be placed under a county-directed postrelease community supervision program instead of the state’s parole system. The state is giving additional funding to the 58 counties in California to deal with the increased correctional population and responsibility; however, each county must develop a plan for custody and post-custody that best serves the needs of the county. After record low jail populations between yearend 2010 and yearend 2011, the California jail population increased in 2012 by an estimated 7,600 inmates since yearend 2011 (figure 2). The Bureau of Justice Statistics will continue to analyze population characteristics in California’s jails and describe how these jails affect the nationwide jail population. ******************************************************** Increase in new bed space between 2011 and 2012 was nearly a third of the average annual increase since 2000, while the percentage of capacity occupied held Steady ******************************************************** Rated capacity in jails reached 886,947 beds at midyear 2012, an increase of 0.8% (7,225 beds) from 879,722 beds in midyear 2011 (figure 3, table 5). The increase between 2011 and 2012 was about a third of the average annual increase each year between 2000 and 2011 (2.4% or 20,942 beds). Rated capacity is the maximum number of beds or inmates allocated to each jail facility by a state or local rating official. The percentage of rated capacity occupied at midyear 2012 (84%) was the lowest since 1984 (86%). Jail jurisdictions holding 1,000 or more inmates reported the highest percentage of occupied bed space at midyear 2011 (88%) and 2012 (89%), compared to jails holding fewer than 50 inmates at midyear 2011 and 2012 (66% in each years) (table 6). In addition to measuring the rated capacity occupied based on the inmate count at midyear, the measurement can be based on an ADP in jail jurisdictions during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2012, and by the number of inmates on the most crowded day in jails during June 2012. Using these two measures, the nation’s jails operated at about 83% of rated capacity on an average day and about 90% of rated capacity on their most crowded day in June 2012. While the confined population and rated jail capacity both increased at roughly comparable rates from 2000 through 2008, the growth rates have diverged since 2008. The confined population declined by about 1.3% on average per year, while rated capacity increased by about 1.7% on average per year. The increase in capacity and decrease in confined population almost equally contributed to the decline in the percentage of capacity occupied, from 95% in 2008 to 84% in 2012. Jail jurisdictions holding between 100 and 249 inmates experienced the largest difference in change rates between rated capacity and the jail inmate population (figure 4). From midyear 2008 to 2012, these jail jurisdictions reported a 2.8% decline in their inmate custody population and a 21.6% increase in their rated capacity. The smallest jail jurisdictions, which held fewer than 50 inmates, reported the smallest difference between change in their inmate population (down 1.1%) and change in rated capacity (up 6.4%). With the exception of an increase in the inmate population for jail jurisdictions holding 50 to 99 inmates, all other jail jurisdictions experienced a decline in their midyear jail population and an increase in their rated capacity. ********************************************** Local jails admitted 11.6 million persons during the 12-month period ending midyear 2012 *********************************************** Local jails admitted an estimated 11.6 million persons during the 12-month period ending June 30, 2012, which was similar to 2011 (11.8 million) and down from 13.6 million in 2008. The number of persons admitted in 2012 was about 16 times the size of the ADP (735,983) during the 12-month period between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012. (See Methodology for methods used to estimate admissions.) Nearly 4 in 10 admissions during the last week of June 2012 were to the largest jail jurisdictions (table 7). Jail jurisdictions holding fewer than 50 inmates accounted for 7.2% of all jail admissions. The number of inmates admitted was about 35 times the size of the ADP between 2011 and 2012. These small jail jurisdictions also experienced the highest turnover rate (131%). The turnover rate in large jail jurisdictions was 50%. Higher turnover rates mean larger numbers of admissions and releases relative to the size of the average daily population. ******************************************************** **************** List of tables **************** Table 1. Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, average daily population, and incarceration rates, 2000–2012 Table 2. Number of inmates in local jails, by characteristics, midyear 2000 and 2005–2012 Table 3. Percent of inmates in local jails, by characteristics, midyear 2000 and 2005–2012 Table 4. Inmates confined in local jails at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2011–2012 Table 5. Rated capacity of local jails and percent of capacity occupied, 2000–2012 Table 6. Percent of jail capacity occupied at midyear, by size of jurisdiction, 2011–2012 Table 7. Average daily jail population, admissions, and turnover rate, by size of jurisdiction, week ending June 30, 2011–2012 Table 8. Inmate population in jail jurisdictions reporting on confined persons being held for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), midyear 2002–2012 Table 9. Persons under jail supervision, by confinement status and type of program, midyear 2000 and 2006–2012 Table 10. Estimated standard errors, by confinement status, 2012 Table 11. Estimated standard errors, by selected characteristics, midyear 2012 Table 12. Estimated percentages of local jail inmates, by selected characteristics and ratio estimates, midyear 2012 ******************************************************** ************* Methodology ************* Annual Survey of Jails ----------------------- In years between the complete census of local jails, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) conducts the Annual Survey of Jails (ASJ). ASJ uses a sample of jail jurisdictions to estimate the number and characteristics of local inmates nationwide. For the 2012 ASJ, the U.S. Census Bureau, as the collection agent, drew a sample of 874 jail jurisdictions represented by 929 jail facilities (referred to as reporting units). This sample represents about 2,800 jail jurisdictions nationwide. Local jail jurisdictions include counties (parishes in Louisiana) or municipal governments that administer one or more local jails. The 2012 ASJ sample included all jails with certainty (67) that were operated jointly by two or more jurisdictions (also referred to as multi-jurisdictional jails). Other jail jurisdictions included with certainty (268) were those that- - ?? * held juvenile inmates at the time of the 2005 Census of Jail Inmates and had an average daily population (ADP) of 500 or more inmates during the 12 months ending June 30, 2005 * held only adult inmates and had an ADP of 750 or more. The remaining jurisdictions were stratified into two groups: jurisdictions with jails holding at least one juvenile on June 30, 2005, and jails holding only adults on that date. Using stratified random sampling, 538 jurisdictions were selected from eight strata based on the two conditions described above, and from four strata based on the average daily jail inmate population reported in the latest Census of Jail Inmates completed in 2005. BJS obtained data from sampled jail jurisdictions by mailed and web-based survey questionnaires. After follow-up phone calls and facsimiles, the response rate for data reporters was nearly 100% for critical items, such as the number of inmates confined, ADP, and rated capacity. (See tables 10, 11, and 12 for standard errors associated with reported estimates from the ASJ 2012.) *************************************************** Response rate, nonresponse adjustment, and out-of Scope jail facilities *************************************************** The 2012 ASJ sampling frame comprised 929 reporting units. Ninety-four percent (or 861) of the 920 individual reporting units responded to the 2012 data collection, and 59 individual reporting units did not respond to the survey.*** Footnote *The sampling frame initially comprised 929 units. However, nine units were out-of-scope for the 2012 data collection because they had closed, either permanently or temporarily, which resulted in the sampling frame of 920 active respondents***. BJS imputed the data for six of these 59 non-responding reporting units, as they belong to jurisdictions with at least one responding reporting unit (hence their jurisdiction is partial responder). For the remaining 53 reporting units (that did not respond) BJS implemented nonresponse weights adjustment procedures. Respondent indicators ----------------------- The respondent reporting unit indicator JAILRhij is set for each individual reporting unit j in jurisdiction i in stratum h on the file, based on the status of the individual reporting unit. = 0 if nonrespondent, closed, or outofscope. 1 if respondent or using prior year data JAILRhij { The respondent jurisdiction indicator JURISRhi is set for each jurisdiction i in stratum h on the file, based on the value of JAILRhij for the reporting units within the jurisdiction. { 1 if JURISRhi = 0 otherwise. j=1 ni JAILRhij 1 Active indicators ------------------- The active reporting unit indicator JAILAhij is set for each individual reporting unit j in jurisdiction i in stratum h on the file, based on the status of the individual reporting unit. = 0 if closed, or outofscope. {1 if respondent, using prior year data, or nonrespondent JAILAhij The active jurisdiction indicator JURISAhi is set for each jurisdiction i in stratum h on the file, based on the value of JAILAhij for the reporting units within the jurisdiction. JURISAhi = { 1 if 0 otherwise. j=1 ni JAILAhij ***************************************** Nonresponse weighting adjustment factor ***************************************** The nonresponse weighting adjustment factor is calculated within each stratum. BJS uses the sample weights in the nonresponse adjustment factor. The nonresponse weighting adjustment factor F2h is calculated as F2h = JURISAhi i=1 nh Whi × JURISRhi i=1 nh Whi × where nh = number of jurisdictions in stratum h, whi = sample weight for jurisdiction i in stratum h. ************* Final weight ************* The final weight FWhi for each jail jurisdiction on the 2012 ASJ data file is calculated as FWhi= F2h Whi JURISRhi × × Where Whi= sample weight for jurisdiction i in stratum h. JURISRhi is used to set the final weight to 0 for units that are closed, out-of-scope, or nonrespondents. *************************************************** Final weight post-stratification: California jail jurisdictions and the Public Safety Realignment *************************************************** Because of the California Public Safety Realignment, between midyear 2011 and midyear 2012, California jails experienced a significant increase in the number of inmates (about 8,500 inmates) that was not experienced by jails nationwide. Consequently, California jails do not represent other jail jurisdictions nationwide. To ensure that the sampled (both with certainty and non-certainty) California jail jurisdictions represent California jurisdictions only, BJS computed new weights. Without computing new weights, the estimated nationwide jail population would be erroneously inflated. The post-stratification final weight adjustment is calculated for each stratum from which California jurisdictions were sampled. More specifically for each stratum, two new strata and set of weights are created: one for the California jurisdictions (PSCAh) and one for the non-California jurisdictions (PSCAh). The weights for those strata from which California jail jurisdictions were not sampled remain unchanged. The post-stratification adjustment for California jail jurisdictions is computed as where NCAh = number of California jail jurisdictions in stratum h (as determined from the 2005 Census of Jail Inmates), nCAh = number of sampled California jail jurisdictions in stratum h. Note that there were a total of 10 California jail jurisdictions that belonged to two strata from which no California jail jurisdictions were sampled. Those 10 jail jurisdictions were moved from their original strata and placed into the most similar stratum from which California jail jurisdictions were sampled. The post-stratification adjustment for non-California jurisdictions is computed as PSCAh= NCAh JURISRCAhi where NCAh = number of non-California jurisdictions in stratum h, computed as nCAh = number of sampled non-California jail jurisdictions in stratum h. ***************************** Item nonresponse imputation ***************************** Average daily population (ADP) and rated capacity -------------------------------------------------- Based on the 2012 ASJ, over 99% of the 867 (including estimates for six nonrespondents) individual reporting units provided valid data on their ADP (860) and rated capacity (862). To calculate a national ADP and rated capacity estimate, data were estimated for the reporting units that did not report specific data. Estimates were calculated based on the following criteria: * Data for 7 individual reporting units included ADP data based on estimates from the 2011 Annual Survey of Jails. * Data for 2 individual reporting units included data based on the design capacity reported in the 2012 Annual Survey of Jails. * Data for 3 individual reporting units included rated capacity data based on estimates from the 2011 Annual Survey of Jails. Inmate characteristics ----------------------- Based on the 2012 ASJ, about 98% of the 867 (including estimates for six nonrespondents) individual reporting units provided valid data on sex and age and race/Hispanic origin. Nearly 91% of respondents provided data on inmate conviction status. To calculate a national rate for inmate characteristics, data were estimated based on the ratio of the reported characteristic population to the total midyear confined population. Weekly admission and release estimation procedures --------------------------------------------------- Based on the 2012 ASJ, 844 of the 867 (including estimates for six nonrespondents) individual reporting units (97%) provided valid data on weekly admissions or releases. To calculate an overall weekly estimate, data on offender flows through local jails were estimated for the 23 reporting units that did not report specific data on admissions and releases. Release data were estimated for 9 reporting units that reported data on admissions, but not on releases. Estimates were calculated based on the following criteria: * Data for 1 individual reporting unit included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2007 ASJ. * Data for 1 individual reporting unit included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2009 ASJ. * Data for 5 individual reporting units included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2010 ASJ. * Data for 16 individual reporting units included admission and release data based on estimates from the 2011 ASJ. * Release data for 9 individual reporting units were based on admission data reported in 2012. ****************************** Calculating annual admissions ****************************** The ASJ collects data on weekly admissions. BJS determined that the June admission data from the 2004 Survey of Large Jails (SLJ) were a reliable source to calculate a nationwide annual admission estimate. Although the number of admissions to jails fluctuated throughout the year, the SLJ tracked monthly movements from January 2003 to January 2004 and showed that the June 2003 count (339,500) closely matched the annual average number of admissions (342,956). The number of annual admissions was calculated by multiplying the weekly admissions by 366 days and dividing by 7 days. *********************************** Calculating weekly turnover rates *********************************** Weekly jail turnover rates were modeled after the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. Additional information on turnover rates is available at http://www.bls.gov/jlt/. Jail turnover rates were calculated by adding admissions and releases, and then dividing by the ADP. The turnover rate takes into account jail admissions and releases and gives an indication of the fluctuation of the jail population. ****************************** Jurisdiction size categories ****************************** For the 2011 and 2012 reports, BJS categorized jurisdiction sizes, based on the average daily jail population during the 12 months ending midyear 2006 (which was the first year in the current ASJ series). For the 2010 report, comparisons of size categories from midyear 2009 to midyear 2010 were based on the ADP during the 12 months ending midyear 2009. In previous reports (2007 through 2009), the size category comparisons were based on the 12 months ending midyear of the specific collection year. As a result, not all data in previous reports are comparable with data in this report. *********************************** Estimating California’s midyear jail population *********************************** The ASJ is a sample survey, and data are not representative of individual states. Data from about 70% of California’s jail jurisdictions are included in the 2006-2012 Annual Survey of Jails. Based on yearend data of California’s jail population collected through BJS’s Deaths in Custody Reporting Program, 70% of California’s jail jurisdictions included in ASJ accounted for about 97.5% of all California’s jail population in any given year from 2005 to 2011. To calculate a midyear jail population, BJS applied the proportion of the latest yearend non-ASJ sample of California’s jail population to the midyear inmate population in the ASJ sample for that year. For example: ASJ sample of California’s jail population at midyear 2012 = 76,667 Proportion of the latest non-ASJ sample of California jail population at yearend 2011 = 2.5868% (76,667 * .025868) + (76,667)= 78,650 estimated midyear jail Population ***************** Jail functions ***************** Jails in the ASJ include confinement facilities—usually administered by a local law enforcement agency—that are intended for adults but may hold juveniles before or after adjudication. Facilities include jails and city or county correctional centers; special jail facilities, such as medical or treatment release centers, halfway houses, and work farms; and temporary holding or lockup facilities that are part of the jail’s combined function. Inmates sentenced to jail facilities usually have a sentence of 1 year or less. Within the ASJ, jails-- * receive individuals pending arraignment and hold them awaiting trial, conviction, or sentencing * re-admit probation, parole, and bail bond violators and Absconders * temporarily detain juveniles pending transfer to juvenile authorities * hold mentally ill persons pending their movement to appropriate mental health facilities * hold individuals for the military, for protective custody, for contempt, and for the courts as witnesses * release convicted inmates to the community upon completion of sentence * transfer inmates to federal, state, or other authorities * house inmates for federal, state, or other authorities because of crowding of their facilities * sometimes operate community-based programs as alternatives to incarceration. ***************************************** Terms and definitions used in the report ***************************************** Admissions--Persons are officially booked and housed in jails by formal legal document and the authority of the courts or some other official agency. Jail admissions include persons sentenced to weekend programs and who are booked into the facility for the first time. Excluded from jail admissions are inmates re-entering the facility after an escape, work release, medical appointment or treatment facility appointment, and bail and court appearances. BJS collects jail admissions for the last 7 days in June. Average daily population--The average is derived by the sum of inmates in jail each day for a year, divided by the number of days in the year (i.e., between July 1, 2011, and June 30, 2012). Average annual change--The mean average change across a 12-month time period. Calculating annual admissions--BJS collects the number of jail admissions during the last 7 days in June. Annual jail admissions are calculated by multiplying weekly admissions by the sum of 366 days divided by 7 days. Calculating weekly jail turnover rate--This rate is calculated by adding admissions and releases and dividing by the average daily population. See Calculating weekly turnover rates for additional information. Inmates confined at midyear--The number of inmates held in custody on the last weekday in June. Jail incarceration rate--The number of inmates held in the custody of local jails, per 100,000 U.S. residents. Percent of capacity occupied--This percentage is calculated by taking the number of inmates at midyear, dividing by the rated capacity, and multiplying by 100. Rated capacity--The number of beds or inmates assigned by a rating official to a facility, excluding separate temporary holding areas. Releases--Persons released after a period of confinement (e.g., sentence completion, bail or bond releases, other pretrial releases, transfers to other jurisdictions, and deaths). Releases include those persons who have completed their weekend program and who are leaving the facility for the last time. Excluded from jail releases are temporary discharges including work release, medical appointment or treatment center, court appearance, furlough, day reporting, and transfers to other facilities within the jail’s jurisdiction. Under jail supervision but not confined--This classification includes all persons in community-based programs operated by a jail facility. Programs include electronic monitoring, house arrest, community service, day reporting, and work programs. The classification excludes persons on pretrial release and who are not in a communitybased program run by the jail, as well as persons under supervision of probation, parole or other agencies, inmates on weekend programs, and inmates who participate in work release programs and return to the jail at night. Weekend programs--Offenders in these programs are allowed to serve their sentences of confinement only on weekends (i.e., Friday to Sunday). *********************************************************** The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. William J. Sabol is the acting director. This report was written by Todd D. Minton. Margaret Noonan verified the report. Jennifer Deppe carried out the data collection and processing with assistance provided by Beth Davis, Lorelle Dennis, and Joshua Giunta, under the supervision of Stephen Simoncini and Heather C. West, Ph.D., Governments Division, Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. Suzanne Dorinski and Rekha Kudlur provided statistical and technical assistance. Vanessa Curto and Jill Thomas edited the report, and Tina Dorsey produced the report under the supervision of Doris J. James. May 2013, NCJ 241264 *********************************************************** *************************************************** Office of Justice Programs Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.gov ************************************************** *********************************************************** 5/10/2013/ JER/ 11:45